Radeon RX 6750 XT vs GeForce GT 640

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 640 and Radeon RX 6750 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 640
2012, $99
2 GB DDR3, 65 Watt
2.78
RX 6750 XT
2022, $549
12 GB GDDR6, 250 Watt
49.46
+1679%

6750 XT outperforms GT 640 by a whopping 1679% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking86269
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.2045.93
Power efficiency3.3315.41
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 22
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date5 June 2012 (14 years ago)3 March 2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99 $549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RX 6750 XT has 22865% better value for money than GT 640.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3842560
Core clock speed902 MHz2150 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2600 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate28.86416.0
Floating-point processing power0.6927 TFLOPS13.31 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs32160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40
L0 Cacheno data640 KB
L1 Cache32 KB512 KB
L2 Cache256 KB3 MB
L3 Cacheno data96 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length145 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.51 GB/s432.0 GB/s
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA3.0-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GT 640 2.78
RX 6750 XT 49.46
+1679%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 640 1161
Samples: 5079
RX 6750 XT 20695
+1683%
Samples: 5785

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 640 1560
RX 6750 XT 37609
+2311%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD9−10
−94.5%
163
1440p4−588
+2100%
4K2−350
+2400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.003.37
+69.4%
1440p24.756.24
+74.8%
4K49.5010.98
+77.8%
  • RX 6750 XT has 69% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 6750 XT has 75% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 6750 XT has 78% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 245 245
Counter-Strike 2 353 353
Cyberpunk 2077 165 165
Resident Evil 4 Remake 195 195

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 176 176
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 346 346
Cyberpunk 2077 127 127
Far Cry 5 178 178
Fortnite 210−220 210−220
Forza Horizon 4 190−200 190−200
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 280−290 280−290

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 104 104
Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 220 220
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 109 109
Dota 2 154 154
Far Cry 5 170 170
Fortnite 210−220 210−220
Forza Horizon 4 190−200 190−200
Grand Theft Auto V 162 162
Metro Exodus 127 127
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 245 245
Valorant 280−290 280−290

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 98 98
Dota 2 131 131
Far Cry 5 158 158
Forza Horizon 4 190−200 190−200
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 135 135
Valorant 280−290 280−290

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 210−220 210−220

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 126 126
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400 350−400
Grand Theft Auto V 106 106
Metro Exodus 76 76
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 300−350 300−350

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 60 60
Far Cry 5 141 141
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110 100−110

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 130−140 130−140

4K
High

Atomic Heart 40−45 40−45
Counter-Strike 2 33 33
Grand Theft Auto V 104 104
Metro Exodus 47 47
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 79 79
Valorant 290−300 290−300

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85 80−85
Counter-Strike 2 60−65 60−65
Cyberpunk 2077 26 26
Dota 2 101 101
Far Cry 5 78 78
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85 80−85

4K
Epic

Fortnite 70−75 70−75

This is how GT 640 and RX 6750 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6750 XT is 1711% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6750 XT is 2100% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6750 XT is 2400% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.78 49.46
Recency 5 June 2012 3 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 250 Watt

GT 640 has 74% lower power consumption.

RX 6750 XT, on the other hand, has a 1679% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6750 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 640 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 1848 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 3356 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6750 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 640 or Radeon RX 6750 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.